Choudhri v. New York City Department of Education

49 A.D.3d 299, 852 N.Y.2d 133

Opinion

There was substantial evidence in the record to support the [300] charges of misconduct based upon petitioner’s undisputed acts of insubordination relating to his excessive use of the Internet for nonbusiness reasons. Given that evidence, combined with petitioner’s many disruptive absences, late arrivals, and early departures, the determination to terminate petitioner’s employment was not so disproportionate as to shock the judicial conscience (see Matter of Martinez v City of New York, 281 AD2d 187 [2001]).

We have considered petitioner’s remaining contentions, including that his due process rights were violated, and find them unavailing. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Saxe, Gonzalez and Acosta, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Choudhri v. New York City Department of Education, 49 A.D.3d 299, 852 N.Y.2d 133 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

49 A.D.3d 299 (Choudhri v. New York City Department of Education) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Martinez v. City of New York
281 A.D.2d 187 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)